Morning journal and courier., 1887-06-18
News by Telegraph
| FROM ALL QUARTERS.
DR.. SMYfH DISMISSED
From His Chair At Andover
Seminary.
lTHE FINDING 07M BOARD.
Professor Woodruff Also
Loses His Place.
SHARP AND HIS THOUSANDS.
Coercion Passes The Com
mittee Stage.
SHARP AND HIS THOUSANDS.
DlsMIssALS AT ANDOvRR.

| DIR. Smyth And Professor woodruff
Dropped From Their Chairs AS A
| Result of The Charges of Heresy.
| ANDovER, Mass, June 1.-THE board OF
| visitors of the Theological seminary voted
to- day to dispense with the services of Presi-
dent E. G. Smyth and Professor Woodruff
| The following is the decision; At q meeting
| of the visitors of the theological institution
| in Phillips' academy in Andover held June
4, 1887, the complaint, as amended, against
Egbert G. Smyth, D. D., Brown professor of
ecclesiastical history in said institution, the
answer thereto, the evidence laid before
them and the arguments in behalf of the
complainsnts and respondent were further
considered by the visitors and they find that
said Egbert C.. Smyth as such professor
maintains. and inculestes beliefs inconsistent
with and repugnant, to the creed of said
institution and the statutes of the same, and
contrary to the true intent of the founders
thereof as expressed in said statutes in the
following particulars, as charged in said
amended complaint, to wit: That the bible
is not "the only perfect rule of faith and
practice" but is fallible and untrustworthy
even in some of its religious teachings. That
no man has powe: or capacity to repent
without knowledge of God in Christ. That
there is and will be probation after death
for all men who do not decis1vely reject
Christ during the earthly life. And there
upon they do adjudge and decree that said
Egbert G. Smyth be and he hereby is remov-
ed from the Office of Brown professor of &C.
elesiastical history in said institution and
said Office is hereby declared vacant.
Voted-That the secretary notify said
Edbert G. Smyth, the complainant and the
trustees of Phillips academy of the foregoing
findings and action thereon by the visitors.
At the same meeting it was decided that
the charges against the following associate
professors were not sustained: William ].
Tucker, Bartlett professor of sacred rhetoric;
John w. Churchill, Jone professor of elocu-
ton; George Harris Abbot professor of
Christian Theology, and Edward Y. Hincks,
Smith professor of Biblical Theology sever
ally in said institution.
Rev. Mr.. Eustis declined to act thereon
with his associates upon the ground that he
was not present on the day of the hearing on
said complaints when said respondents
severally appeared and made their state
ments in defense thereto.
The trustees regret the charges against the
professors were not first brought before them
and carried to the visitors on appeal it at all.
They say: The question at issue is not
whether the views and teachings of the
professors are contrary to the great historic
creeds of the church, nor whether they are
contrary to the creeds of the churches in
eastern Massachusetts when the seminary
was established, nor whether they are con-
trary to any of the known views of the
founders, but whether they are contrary to
the views which the founders embodied in
the creed that they prescribed as the test of
the doctrinal soundness of all who should &C.
cupy chairs of instruction in the seminary
We cannot read into this creed anything not
plainly there; nor can we read out of it any
thing that is plainly there. The creed just
as it stands is the best. It was claimed by
the complainants that the creed must be in
terpreted strictly according to the known
views of the founders, whether these views
lie in the very language of the creed or not.
This is manifestly wrong. The fundamental
rule of construction of instruments forbids
it. They must speak for themselves. Only
by great liberty of Interpretation could all
the founders have signed their own creed,
for they differed widely in regard to some of
tne lnos1 lmpoItau1 oocsilnes eApfessoo
in the creed. And only by great
liberty of Interpretation could all
the former professors have retained
their chairs, for they differed widely in their
views touching several of the....fundamental
doctrines represented in the creed. The
trustees and visitors alike have followed this
liberty of Interpretation in the past. Indeed
in no other way could the seminary have been
administered SO as to carry out the great in
tent of the founders. We can see no reason
why the same liberty of Interpretation should
be denied to the present accused professors
which was granted to their predecessors, more
than one of whom in their day were charged
with infdelity to the creed.